sick sh*t

hello , this time or again. This is another, not really the first post about me.

about me? no rili it is about censoring and terror just as much. but how are you to believe that?
i dont even think my mum beliefs what happens to me all these years.

She does her best for me, or something closely aking a humans best, i love her, but to the topic
i am going to write about it isnt that much help, i get so mad, time and again being disqualified for justice, i cant have a normal discussion about it without getting mad.

justice should be real, and not for the rich by the rich. justice should be for people because otherways the law is against people,

people dont have to be lawfull, when the law is only against them.

that is why justice has a principle of equality, and laws and rights have a long tradition that they need to be correct to be applied.

starting with proof, but also a guarantee against personal prosecution, s guarantee basically for equality before the law.

if one person cannot be punished , to an extent or more, for something, also noone else should.
those kinds of principles.

i wont mention all of those instances of justice degraded to me in person beforehand, i may even write this whole story several times,

obviously i do what they want. by reacting in the public they will have opportunity to find contraptions and disqualifications they would need to otherwise learn by painfull faillure against many different people, who do not theirselves collect and have the argument.

a law that allows for no rights for me, fortunately is not internationaly allowed, not considered humane.

more on this tomorrow.

SP and why PVDA

with mubarak gone i have some peace of mind, not that it would last long, i pretty much hope that the world will keep a focus on all the states that change regimes and even to develop strategy's to support changes. in egypt what i think is important is fair ( and that is a very very most doubtfull thing in even many western nations , so...) and indeed well prepared elections.

quick elections is also support, yet it is of the greatest importance the process of political diversity (that might be a better guarantee for creativity and tolerance..) takes of at great speed. the former state television might serve as a progressive , and unbiased platform, but that would need a takeover. hard to say who to delegate that or even who might have a independent contribution professionally. alJazeera springs to mind, but actually, keeping in mind even that is moderated progressivity, sometimes for good sometimes for bad, you might as well slip for example english and french broadcasters into the mix of a reality marathon of dreams and conceptions.

if a thoughtfull and challenging debate can get into the open, and the inspiration of the youth that has allways been the inspiration of revolution and progress taken seriously, why not would a wonderfull people like the egyptians, and a basically rather decent and thoughtprovoking religion like islam be enough for one of those great steps on the republican track, that is much better conceived as a grassroots democracy of by now also by wire connected participants.

progress is only tolerance. new ideas have not allways been fought violently and bitter, but they have allways been the only source for progress. i hope people can think themselves of that new circumstances, (and perhaps new 'challenges') bring about new ideas.

so why SP?

the dutch elections system exist of 4 parts atm.

from my pov. the national ones are the most important, because i am very often occupied with trying international and civil laws.

someone said i already threw away this regional elections one, however immediatly finding an excuse. personally i would agree with a boycot of the elections, however it usually only serves them well. we have piles of unelected representation, so for the authority to say we did short at our obligation to vote, we still dont get empty seats, and without it it could only be even worse, sometimes people tell each other what they voted (abouts 95% of time SP or groen links(green) for me). so you get a sort of reference.

so no matter thats it is bullshit and legitimising for looks at least the hidden layers of elitist and nepotist decission making, i will try to explain why i bother with singling out one or two partys for a voting advise.

Basically the new green party (groen links) forerunner managed to say it all in one line. "U is chiquer".

right, that great inheretance, of marxism and pacifism now is "chiquer".

well, best i think that is amateuristic. But it is true they are a bunch of inconsequential liberals, and awkward at it, they hate it so much when i am critical i might expect political represailles for being against them here. liberals, and amateurs, the profs know how not to intimidate me.

that they never eached out to the plenty people supporting them has only one reason, nearly everyone in that parliament is bought. for sale, proprietary class and "academically" biased.

theres a heap of unelected ones behind the screens anyway, and i am sorry that i can't be enthusiast for the "waterschappen", to me it seems just another layer of cliquejobs, more probably in the way then aiding progress, and as things went the past years, probably armed by a own police authority to boot. might well be the final piece in a puzzel of demobilising the 90% of people that have nearly nothing.

so.. i feel sorry for not being happy with it, for some people (my mum basically) does think it can be a contribution to democracy, but i propose we first make the existing systems democratic,
quite a job, and nice material for a revolution.

basically beside a religious vote i had all the choices except for the upper class. the religious vote is an upperclass one, but people that are religious belief something different, they belief it doesn't matter as long as you belief. in fact i wonder if i would declare exactly such votes void;)

there is also the party for animals. i propose that next town elections we all vote that in zutphen,
that way we have a test.

i think it wont deliver much, even if we 80 or so & vote them, certainly not outside townlevel.

there is a simple clue of power to censoring the animal party from the results, and my fellow animalfriends, i am quite sure a few more seats in a rising trend is your actual part...

but just like the green, when it goes somewhere there is not the oversight to claim it in such results, and perhaps not the wish. (what do you think a seat pays on a swiss bank account, its not nothing).

the socialists are better at that and more professional, other partys are hardly worth mentioning. anarchism or communists that i bet never got their seats either, are not there, the rightwing is a fake, and the extreme right is not only a fake, but also exactly the kind of vote that you could actually marginalise as contrary to human rights. psychopaths may vote, buta psychopath policy is illegal. void.

so, SP has the best slogan: PROTEST.

yet the PVDA has more chance to get some actual seats. SP is somewhat less professional in the murky world of politics, and PVDA is indeed already compromised to a greater extent.

often very conservative, and btw i think has been a great partner in international politics.
i very much appreciate the many good sides of the dutch labour movement and politics,
and i will probably vote PVDA altho i campaign for SP.

because i see no credibility in the dutch political system. SP will also be defrauded from their votes to see them dumped on nazitrends "those are also protest votes" or a similar weak joke for argument.

there is really no other option, altho i'd want the SP to grow, but to vote PVDA, and be defrauded as such.

in dutch electoral politics the people lost. it's fake, fraude and complicit, (even the sp perhaps).

this nation needs a revolution so that we can have a real democracy. after that progress will slowly show that anarchism delivers the most productive ideas, but for it to come true doing away with the fake democracy would be a great start.

double dutch exposed

ahead of me the unpleasant task to try to describe the current mediapolitical climate in the netherlands.

Do the media do well? well honestly ? the media i know off, no.
they do about 4% well, and about 99% badly. I got into the habit of not spending much time on it tho, certain comments sections on teh internet do offer a consequent countervoice, when people really dedicate to it. However you might say tehre is such an urge in people with less usefull opinions to shout them out , always replying on such becomes rather a headache. That besides teh arguments aren't always even worth making, it is not said such conservative repetitions are real or even a produce of humans, it might as well be scripts, just out to convince the masses of the existance of a dumber mass. Perhaps also really dumb opiniated people are stimulated in voicing them loudly and prefered over a more moderate and negotiating comment.

Often to look for sth positive well placed and a true observation you'd have to spit through 7, 8 pages of doubtfull news of doubtfull integrity, and worse, obviously ill willing intend. in the free newspapers taht are distributed to the workers in the mornings i end up reading teh football news, cus at least that is about nothing, and so it doesn't hurt so much that it may be lies.

I dont want to get into its generality's but push right through what is the politics behind it. Basically i think, netherlands used to have tolerant value's, we grew used to rather some freedom, in the process and for many years we have been wel proud for what we achieved, the lifestandard and social standards we (often) met.

that lasted so from 1955 to 1980, and before that, perhaps even in the colonial area dutch have felt modern, and tolerant, not all dutch and not always, but definetly it has been an aspect of our people's personality to try progressive thought. In teh old christian days it failed miserably, the renewing movements seemed to be ugglier then what they did away with, but it had some elan, there was an attempt towards justice.

In the late industrial era, but not untill the very start of the digital era, dutch value's overall qualified nicely. Human rights, police government, freedom of expression, bipartisanship, were value's often well practiced and not uncommonly researched by many elements of the media. It didn't always go well, but those were times of great social advances still.

Even before europe became a fact, and before the digital era started, there was a trend however towards the opposite. interest-groups had to be turned into ngo's in that period to through payed management make them dependent and negotiable. In every case for example teh government made a point of having a public discussion, wich they did pretend a few times, teh publ;ic took care to get some of the facts on the table.

Really in the sense of juicy research, thorough rationalisation, analyses, those were great days.
As i say it was pre digitally, and yet in the late industrial , modern, era copy machines, printers, stencil, each of tehse media had contributed to sets of alternative magazines that filled the gaps in information now more commonly accesible (but not quite as structurally applied) through internet.

One of these magazines was "BLUF!". it lighted out many juridical absues and malperceptions, corruption even, it was extremely critical towards tyranny anywhere, evry cultural, and abiding and promoting to every human right.

You understand teh people that did teh work, the research and are the inspiration were pretty dedicated and worked hard for hardly any pay. Becus more free then that? no, we haven't had.

he magazine had a tendency to publish very very strong articles that were the condensation of much more documeted and wider research of other magazines, and some ideological recoinaisance's. It also published press statements of action groups, soemtimes of foreign pressure groups, or illegal party's, teh iraki resistance, the kurds the irish teh basques, it had a somewhat european focus, but that was more because practically the information-exchange often was limited mostly to the european circuit without internet.

among many other things it also covered the housing rights of netherlands, more specifically also squatting. It happened to be that he cultural squatting movement was also the humanitarian active group. Especially renewing efforts found their roots there. For excample the effect in clothing worldwide, hairdress, but also theatre, decor, lightshows, music, alternative music, surrealist, nihilist and even geometric influences hahe much to do with the cultural movement of the 60s, 70s early 80s
why do i need to tell you all this?????

well it happened in these days that some(..) we now call them "the neocons" decided tehy wanted a society thatw as far more blunt, far more stratified, far more unfair,
far more plain, far more dumb in other words: more capitalist.

To that end a lot changed, step by step, sometimes sth. good, but usually sth. bad.
It hit housing rights, incomes, healthcare, it send people to prison, it generally hit the atmosphere hard, it hit the credibility and worst of all it managed to intrude the minds of the people, setting them back, prejudicing them and creating a lot of fear between people. It also obstructed justice, by just not abiding teh dutch law sth. treated as precedents are created, but actually it means nto even agreements have value, just because they label people they deny them basic rights of justice.

This however didn't happen on the level of huge direct violence, well it did, but it escaped the eye of the many, the terror, the measure of direct repression wasn't enormous always, not often teh secret police beat someone up , it happened a lot when sth was going on tho, and completely out of any proportion usually (i have witnessed many times) that (secret) police used excessive violence, what i mean is thatnot many a [political one, an activist was beaten up in their houses or at night on teh streets, although the circumstances have their creepy aspects..
i know i have an incorrect dossier wich briefs the police eg. so when i meet them they are more dangerous to me then they should, wich not rarely results in a scary confrontation if tehy seek any.

so its scary and dangerous, but not openly or outright violence in the daily life.
After some trial and error the atetmpts to get you to work for them also loose the direct and indignant initial character.

"They" the police, the secret services, (can) know me better then even i myself, they can tehrefore lie about me better then i even myself could, they certainly have their powers, and with the justice system being proven unidirectional biased, and elitarist, reknownedly nepotist, what have you to count on.

So some stress they standardly deliver. otoh with somewhat more usual affairs, they donlt necessarilly misbehave(although then they are not as informed about ur identity, and unless real danger for themselves is thinkable, you can also count on them somewhat. (they are not rili objective tho, i figure there are a lot of people who think they tend to anyhow draw the wrong straw). Sometimes they are quite smart and social, othertimes they are really stupid not uncommonly so biased they find argument in even reasonable speach,( a lot of ppl who know that start out rough), rather like the usual schooled professional that wants to think they know how to treat their business.

When you start out a bit rough and things can get constructive usually you know you met someone who can stand a small creep to suffer less of a shivver.

Man if u r rili a criminal? hwo can you talk to the police? what about? that too is an element in the policy of teh netherlands, turning it into a policestate.

It's amazing, perplexing flabbergasting, and awfull, yet it's all to true, teh distance and authority of police is accentuated, despite a policy that claims to be a friend of all these people that are so scared they are rather an insult to a sane human.
scared for me, friends, or other people or reasons that need no fear, well not the kind they tend to imagine at least.

The ironic of it it alienates a lot of principally rather good people. This underlying fear.. taht sth odd or awfull could happen, ofcourse always existed.These days however it is exagerated. People are scared on a daily bases by millions, for even things that happen 3 times a year to at most 2.

it is not a way to solve a problem, but it is much more dangerous then teh fear that was teh bases. It legitimises measures of fear. Those for some reason shape into patterns of nationalism xenophobism , alienation etc. etc. teh negative psychological effects of teh modern times..

So we see a fear that creates terror and repression, but is actually very minor compared to teh danger of not polluting the environment.(cycling).

over and over this legitimisation is recycled as legitimisation for still more repression. nwo we did that oh they won't notice we do a bit more.
and actually they get away with it. people can be scared with nothing once? they can be scared with it again. you can imagine the sheer perversness of with what teh media and politics occupy the mind is of ridiculous proportion. Moreso becus it is uncompromisedly fraudulent. Integrity and transparance, there is not.

back to the ancient magazine 'bluf!'.
BLUF used to be the strongest protagonist of freedom of speech in print, well actually not by far, but the one with some reach, it came under for of procedures, police harrasment etc., and it had an advertisement action in wich a statement strongly for the freedom of expression , speech and reporting, was phrased.

so far so good, some bobo's signed, usual dutch adds like that in the period went with bobo's, and the add was printed.
i don't remember if it was considered a succes, in the end bluf had to resign the struggle, perhaps due to the repression, or more because newer media were taking over peoples spending of time. To some extend the sheer nr of musics, video's, nets games etc. even before internet became some intellectual distraction.

The follow ups to bluf, can be found @ ravage.nl if i am correct.

The paper featured a cartoon of an old grey minister burning her old (seriously grasroot intellectual) blufs.

Thats because there is a witchhunt going on in dutch politics. every day in day out we see prognoses the rednecks are growing, when actually these signs are rare even if you exagerate, specific rednecks, people never ever talk about , are called very popular by dutch media.

And i deal with the kind of people that even have the destute attitude to judge harshly and unwittingly. All of these, and the whole dutch population are joining in the constructive and progressive thoughtsprocesses, so where the hell do they get teh story extreme rightwing patriotism and nitwitzism are gaining in popularity.

also the wilders guy noone ever mentioned to me and get's free seats in parliament, like if they are 2 euro gardens chairs, is not a political phenomenon in the worlds i meet in netherlands, and no, these are not only classy and intellectual.

meanwhile these same people are the excuse to raise security to a level public expenditure would be essentially better off if these people actually emigrated.

and ofcourse all these blatant freedom obstructing notions in teh paliament find their loyal support. One big fake, and people that stopped believing in the news, have much turned away from thinking about politics ()not so strange with so little fact to go by) , or got so confused they stick to just believing the complete nonsense offered. Not that they vote right wing then, just that they are annoying to talk with. right wing votes and the propagation of that you mostly exclusively find among the ultrarich, the top 5% , and less, not their wives eg. some 18 years old that have no clue, and a few that never find a clue either, i did meet one or 2 in my life.

I'd doubt if they think the same because they were still young. some young guys think: i want to be ultrarich so i have to vote as capitalist as i can, (they call themselves the liberals here), ofcourse for a few of them it worx, but not often.

and now theres the witchhunt, what is the premise? what is the intend?
repression and securing a singularly nato minded elite. eliminating every incent for change, the intend is evry negative and involves raising the general level of intolerance, repression, the distance between poor and rich, and the complete disempowerment of the masses, practically, psychologically, and attemptedly politically, the thing that justice is the exact wrong word for.

in this complex political ploy international pressure and planning plays a big role, models of repressive ideas , control, arbitrary legal value, they are applied internationally, netherlands is sometimes even considered a "guidenation" for that, but the opposite , usian and english models(1) that are implemented here happens as often, and without notice.

(1) models of desempowerment , hierarchy, nationalism and most often misleading and propaganda.it's just a personal note that actually many of these models focus around misleading and desinforming people, unfortunately not withour some scary succeses.

taking turns

This is a story about someone i once met on a very special occasion.

Usually I wouldn't relinguish in the memory of this rather straight discourse. It was on an anarchist meeting and i was meeting people i like and whose ideas i love.

However this person is shot and carries a name: Louis Seveke. I didn't really know him, not if i even ever met him before. Somehow our meeting seemed uncoincedentual. I realised i was meeting "someone" and he appeared to realise that our meeting another was special. Of wich we talked. After we reached out, him more friendly then me. I saying rather fairly i hardly ever met people willing to counter a lot of political consequence. We actually conversed on the possibility that someone in netherlands would be eliminated by secret services. I think my opinion was the fear was somewhat legitimate, perhaps he mentioned a few examples, and that he thought the fear was realist. Wich I do but he seemed to be more serious about it. So i said, well they never shot me, and i am rili vocal in nearly all my opinions. Although we sortta excluded others from our experiences on that point he asked me wether i didn't think they would actually pick someone more active within the society. Someone with a more official position or such. I told him maybe, but that i thought not , because exactly when you are active within the limits of officiality , you are usually very limited in your options and scopes.

We talked on a bit about general strategic subjects. I liked him, there was a plenary, he liked me. That wasn't so hard, we tended to agree on intentions.
The last thing we had been talking about was something nijmegen, it got rather specific. I hoped we'd meet again. It was pleasant to meet someone who had thought over so many things in a proper way, and so close to actuality.


Only when he was shot i learned his name. That had indeed appeared in papers in such a way to make a great impression on me about the workings of his person.

The wicked thing is i had been feeling bad for like 3 or 4 days, as if something was planning to shoot me, or perhaps someone else. It's a pitty i hadn't hardly seen anyone in a couple of days, i might have told. Anyway when it happened and i got to hear it, i think one day late, I read everything i could find, read it twice sometimes, starting with everything that mentioned anything the police had said. My impression of that at that time was not favourable; starting with a statement of a policewoman in the paper that suggested a somewhat provincial , what if we say we do everything, you will never get to the bottom of it attitude, there was also a soundtape of a policespokesperson (perhaps the same woman) but that made not so much of an impression. The newsstory was rather full of improbabilitys, for example he would be shot with similar gun and the pictured model was an antiquated weapon.
A picture appeared, that resembled.. me, a bit. The news had been suggested that everything bad could be behind and gossip did the rest. The streets were thoroughly scrobbed and after that a search was started. I myself could think of only one obscure possibility, to fit it into a deed of organised fascism outside the services,
he was not a high profile person, it needed to be something sneaky. These had no to do.

Whatever sprung out is that he was killed on the birthday of the presenation of (&his) book on secret services. A period that had left him with some bitter enemys that at times advocated their hate in media. The police also immediatly seized his every computer including recent projects he was working on. They were not returned (if ever) before a long time.

There was so much written about and around him that i started wondering of between all the mess something would turn up after a while and i put on a newsfeed. As a result I witnessed,when the accused was caught how the original spanish article disappeared and only a dutch (i doubt it was the same) could be found after. The spanish article was rather clear he was wanted for armed and violent robbery in and outside netherlands.

All in all it set me to think. The supposed killer left us with a pile of material, none of wich can be checked on authenticity really. Not by me, and in my eyes it is suspect. Once his lawyer published in the papers, she didn't actually believe him,
that his account of the events was contrary to that of the police.

Anyhow they are proceeding very seriously into the case.. with a big fuzz as all the time. The man was regarded psychologically. He didn't want to get 'the' mark of irresponsability , the usual easy dutch way out with great problems of this kind.

So they are charging him lifelong sentence. I think Louis might turn in his grave if he knew. And as a result i saw the few words of his in he papers. Honestly, he is not completely sane i think. I know i could prove it from the 12 or 14 lines of text i read from him. Although an another article on the same managed nothing of the kind.

I see that a lot in this case. Pulling and steering it into directions. "Costly investigations". "Lefty's shoot another" outrage in the right wing "popular" (or yet fake?) voice. "Dirty squatter"...

Some of the articles contain these lines, permit them, purposedly construct associations. Debilitate the thoughts proces on social change.

Today the family decided to ask a complete view of the AIVD dossier on him. The secret services one. The article (not of the goodwilling kind so much) announces it that its probably not goig to happen. I don't think the secret service would show all that dossier really.

In the proces activists, or otherways socially engaged people, have been pressured in questionings. Both in and outside view the case has been used as a way to get a whole lot of information on the Nijmegen, the town where he lived, and beyonds, humanists.

Closer to him even more disturbing storys have been suggested. I do wonder if anyone has really seen him after death. So in fact when the police says something happened like such and such... and someone declares something completely different, yet to have done it only in the interest of investigation also means nobody knows if the scapegoat is a guilty one or an instant story.

Then again the guy appear to swear its his books and his plans, his maps and his every so suitable belonging that the police found, in a way the supposedly his books should proof something. i rather asked it people that know him.

The extra problem is that the period in wich happened what inspired the story's narrator was actually one in wich the relation between activism and police and not in the least undercover police, was really sharp. Activists had discovered that their most each and every move could and was covered with more straightforward dirty methods of blackmail, reward, and humiliation of the informers then commonly expected from an instrument of justice.

A bitter memory actually for most of us. Family members and all sorts of people had been aproached in greater numbers and more bigotted ways then we ever knew.

Often it showed the informer had been manipulated into most every action and daily lives. I never planned to become any sort of informer, but if anything left a bad taste about what one has to allow ones personality to be that way it is the superficiousness of the informer.

The people that manipulate other people so much and severely, can be expected to cook up more then that. A 16k bankrobber (note: before bigger amounts have been mentioned) with a weirdo story not being the last thing, exactly less when it so perfectly fits their intentions. The message being, if you mess with informers and secret services we will kill you either way. I wonder if an unreal informer would lend himself to that.


(This post might make they don't want to wait with the "Wilders(to boring to make a film?) film . So sit back and relax)

Quorum reaches decorum, mushroom madness

There is the cry , the cretology for resistance in this matter.
The crue 2 crux.

Nevertheless worldwide implications for the psychodelic(ious;) case can be expected of the slightest character, keystroke or compassion.

This is not needed, let us remain human and dare to see simple truths in the easy ligth they deserve.
What is this international fear for suggestion , other then fear to admit that we knowledgably recognise we are easily and readily open for suggestion.

Then why do we fear to light an advantageous course for the sakes of humans kinds?

Only the complete uniformity , of the denial shows, what really shed the light from these cases.

I suggest the term consanity.
It relates to conspiracy.

sanes, insanes and conspirants.
cheers